Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays

From: Gabriele Bartolini <gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Marco Nenciarini <marco(dot)nenciarini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays
Date: 2012-01-31 15:55:42
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi Noah,

Il 21/01/12 21:42, Noah Misch ha scritto:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 08:18:48PM +0100, Marco Nenciarini wrote:
> I greatly like that name; it would still make sense for other 
> aggregate types, should we ever expand its use. Please complete the 
> name change: the documentation, catalog entries, etc should all call 
> them something like "each foreign key constraints" (I don't 
> particularly like that exact wording).
Ok, we'll go with "EACH Foreign Key Constraints" but I would allow the 
synonym "Foreign Key Array", especially in the documentation.
> How about: FOREIGN KEY(col_a, EACH col_b, col_c) REFERENCES pktable 
> (a, b, c)
We really like this syntax. However, as also Simon suggested, we'd go 
for switching to this syntax, but stick to a simpler implementation for 
9.2. We will then be able to expand the functionality, by keeping the 
same syntax, from 9.3.
> To complete the ARRAY -> EACH transition, I would suggest names like 
Sounds perfect.

Marco will go through all your comments and will send version 3 shortly.

Thank you,

  Gabriele Bartolini - 2ndQuadrant Italia
  PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
  gabriele(dot)bartolini(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)it |

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2012-01-31 15:55:54
Subject: Re: Dry-run mode for pg_archivecleanup
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2012-01-31 15:54:28
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump -s dumps data?!

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group